Rudd must give voters a reason to back him

Unlike his predecessor, Kevin Rudd still has the ear of the Australian public. But he just has to get his message right by reclaiming Labor's legacy and casting doubt on an Abbott Australia, writes Latika Bourke.

Kevin Rudd probably has just a few days left to save his election campaign, but there are worrying signs his strategy lacks what is needed to resurrect Labor's chances.

Even the Prime Minister's strategists agree that his campaign has been chaotic, logistically and thematically. His messages, crafted around a series of small skills announcements and local infrastructure grants, lack punch, power and creativity.

His Northern Australia 'thought bubble', as the Opposition refers to it, is an idea pitched for 2018 but more focussed on securing vital Katter preferences in Queensland on September 7.

After the past six years, the question for voters is why this Government deserves another chance. Labor thus far has failed to provide a persuasive answer, even though it has one.

Getting the message right requires Rudd to do better than Julia Gillard did in embracing the legacies of his predecessor.

In short, Rudd needs to start talking about the policies Julia Gillard would be running on if this were her campaign, and reminding voters that Labor's three most popular ideas were its and its alone.

Labor should disregard that there is bipartisan support for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and now, belatedly, its Better Schools funding plan, and argue that only the Government can be trusted to see these schemes through in the interests of a fairer and smarter Australia.

Peter Costello may have delivered surpluses Wayne Swan will only ever dream of handing down, but did the Coalition back in its 'Golden Age' ever propose or implement a National Disability Insurance Scheme? Labor should not only be floating that question in the public's mind but also be following it up with a "Why not?"

The same applies for Better Schools funding, which on the eve of the election being called the Coalition decided it would now support. Why should the community trust the Liberals to see through a policy agenda they called a 'Conski' for nearly two years?

On broadband, Labor can ask the public if it wants faster or slower speeds, and ask which side is best suited to guaranteeing the NBN's future: the party which dreamt up the idea of the network and managed to structurally separate Telstra, or the side which maintained the telco's vertical integration structure while in government?

One Labor MP believes a dull election campaign suits the Opposition. On the flip side, an emotive one would benefit Labor. The ALP needs to set out a vision based on the principle that saw it first elected in 2007 - a fair economy - and ask voters to imagine what an Abbott Australia would look like.

Liberals believe the Government has badly burnt faith and could possibly lose the election as a result of its decisions to raise taxes on cigarettes, impose a levy on the banks, and change the rules around salary packaging for employer-provided cars.

This isn't because these taxes are without merit, but because Labor once again failed to lay the groundwork for the unpleasant task of raising taxes, and in so doing provided the grounds for a devastating "who's next?" attack from the Coalition. This could prove fatal for the Federal Government.

Nevertheless, Labor's three signature policies tie neatly into Rudd's mantra of wanting to boost productivity and competitiveness and diversify the economy.

If handled with some imagination, this message could fly above the uncertainty and broken budget surplus promises that stain Labor's record and work into reassuring worried workers that there are jobs in the new economy.

There has been much complaint from those working on Rudd's campaign that the travelling team - and in particular, the candidate - is micro-managing the campaign, leading to some of the logistical nightmares experienced in the first week. Some of the frustration at the lack of communication has seeped out of Campaign Headquarters in Melbourne and into the media.

This is not surprising, but it should be noted that much of the micro-managing has been due to concerns the party organisation was unprepared for an earlier campaign, and this has hindered Rudd's ability to coordinate some blistering messages against the appropriate campaign backdrops.

Yes, Rudd inherits the dysfunction of the past six years, including broken promises and policy back-flips. And yes, this means it's much more likely that Labor will lose than win.

But Rudd has the one thing Julia Gillard had well and truly lost, and that is the ear of the people, many of whom tell MPs they would do anything to NOT have to vote for Tony Abbott.

Latika Bourke has been travelling with the Prime Minister on the campaign trail as part of the ABC's Election 2013 coverage.

Latika Bourke is a political and social media reporter at the ABC. Follow her on Twitter @latikambourke. View her full profile here.

And don't forget the 35% increase in unemployment since Labor took power.

I really think the 7 years of deficit is also a very strong selling point - especially since it alone totals around $160 Billion. That's a great legacy. It needs to be promoted.

The NBN cost blowout from $4.5 Billion to the latest estimate of $60 Billion is enough to make us very proud of Labor's legacy. We're gonna get new footpaths too, apparently, as part of the remediation.

Goodness me, I'm positively bursting with pride as I think of the wonderful things Mr Rudd and Labor have bestowed on us. Such a great legacy!

How could I not mention the wonderful Carbon Dioxide tax that is now set to hit $38 per tonne shortly - according to the PEFO (and that always tells the truth) - and help kick Australian manufacturing in the arse again MJLC?

Bighead1883:

Here SS.When the Howard government left office, net government debt had ''improved'' by 21.9 per cent of GDP (from 18.1 to -3.8 per cent of GDP).

So how did the Howard government do it? It was very simple, with a three-pronged approach to debt elimination:

&#9632; A record high tax take - the Howard government was the highest taxing government in Australia's history.

&#9632; Record low spending on infrastructure - the level of public construction work done as a percentage of GDP reached a record low under Howard.

&#9632; A large-scale asset sale and privatisation program.

It was a simple formula that worked a treat from a political objective, yet it had little merit as a tool of economic policy management.

Had the Howard government not had the highest tax take in history and simply maintained its tax take at the level of the Hawke/Keating government and nothing else changed, net debt would have risen, not fallen. The difference in the tax to GDP ratio under Howard versus Hawke/Keating was a cumulative 19.2 per cent of GDP over the life of the Howard government.

In other words, a record tax take from households and business accounted for the elimination of net debt.[an excerpt from Steven Koukoulas]

Gher:

Don't forget Howard failing to spend properly to avoid the damaging skills shortage, despite the RBA say flagging this repeatedly for 3 or more years.

Not as many votes in it as baby bonuses and bugger responsible government.

Howard/Costello as supreme economic managers with the good and strength of the economy at heart is one of the greatest myths in Australian history. Even by their own admission - Howard staked his claim that interest rates are always lower under a Coalition goverment. This was then followed by 6 or 7 straight interest rates rises, including during the election campaign of 2007.

They are probably better than Abbott/Hockey who simply parasitise the fallacy of past (mythical) performance guaranteeing future performance. As often noted, when asked Costello pointedly refused to support Abbott as on economics.

MJLC:

16 Aug 2013 7:47:41pm

I'm sure, in your own world, this somehow ties in with what I wrote, and I do acknowledge the effort you've obviously gone to. As such, I'm glad I could help in a small way to bring you some measure of satisfaction SS. Have a good weekend, and do so with my blessings.

RayS:

16 Aug 2013 8:01:45pm

How long have we been told that contractors are cheaper than employees. That's false from my observations. Employees are prepared to work cheaper in return for security and can be trained properly. It's a ten year project. Contractors will be coming and going, seeking extra pay for contract variations, dropping out when other opportunities come up.

Just recruit a permanent workforce, give them the skills and invest in Australians. This cheapskate contractor methodology has ruined Telstra's operations completely and it only works at all because specialist headhunters are pulling old techs and linemen back after they've been paid out or retired.

WhoVotedForPrivatisation.:

Bighead1883:

16 Aug 2013 7:38:16pm

And the injection of paranoia to all the good things that were happening MJLC.It`s so easy to see Murdoch`s schooling coming out in Tony.Lie repeat,lie repeat ad nauseum until the feeble brained know no better.

Algernon:

juliet jones:

16 Aug 2013 7:21:45pm

But Labor will win. People who have never considered Labor are considering it now, at least based on what I'm hearing both personally and from elsewhere. Tony Abbott has alienated women, gays, people who believe in climate change, those who don't hate refugees and those who want a decent NBN to name a few issues. People will chose Labor, not because they are good, but because they are the better alternative.

Mushroom:

james Murphy:

16 Aug 2013 7:55:38pm

I've had the misfortune to work with people who hate foreigners, think climate change is rubbish, hate the idea of gun control, hate gays and the Greens, think the Herald Sun is a legitimate news source, and couldn't spell NBN to save their lives. They also still think it's normal to have their wives wait in the car while they get blind drunk at the pub every night...

They are all pro-union, die-hard Labor voters from the South East of our wonderful country. Care to comment?

big joe:

16 Aug 2013 8:27:54pm

JJ, what a crock, if you are hearing what you say you are hearing I would suggest you get out of the inner city coffee shops and mix with the real people, they are saying something completely different.

Alison Cann:

gary :

16 Aug 2013 7:15:25pm

with respect alison, i don't think he's doing a good job as all he does is criticise the opposition, often distorting what they actually say. the public are beginning to see tony is considerably more authentic. the scare campaign labour uses has failed and abbott is presenting like a very likeable human being despite the propaganda and history that we have all been fed. i'm convinced whatever abbott is, he's a far from being the 'monster' his enemies have lead us to believe. actually quite the opposite.

james Murphy:

16 Aug 2013 8:07:28pm

Fair enough, the government can (and should) criticise the opposition, just as the opposition should criticise the government.

Where the problem lies, is when such criticism overshadows any real debate, and any constructive comments, and when it seems like every 2nd sentence uttered by Rudd/Gillard/Rudd is about the opposition!

Being "on message" should be about what Labor wants to do to make Australia a better country, not about how bad the Opposition is. Similarly, I'd like to see the Liberals be "on message" with what they want to do to make Australia a better country, instead of their constant complaining. I might disagree with them both, but it'd be nice to have some real political discourse during an election campaign, if not all the time.

Alpo:

16 Aug 2013 5:46:04pm

Latika, with the media firmly against Labor, the problem is not contents, the issue is the medium: how to get the message through the barrier built by the "born to rule" with the crucial help of the MSM. The internet is one way to go, the other is the focusing on the marginal seats: both those that must be defended and those that can be gained. Preferences deals are just inevitable and are part of our form of democracy. Those who complain about that are just clowning. Preferences will be essential in most states: Qld, WA, Tas, but also Vic and NSW. Very many people are dissatisfied with the system, very many will seriously look to vote for an Independent this time around, it is what they do with their preferences that will determine the standing of the major Parties. But I do hope that many of those Independents actually do get through and become part of the next Parliament.

The other issue is the vote for the Senate. If the Greens hold the balance of power there, I'm sure that they will behave like true Greens (not like the former Democrats), especially IF the Coalition forms Government.

antipostmodernism:

16 Aug 2013 7:46:21pm

This is the ABC and support for Labor/Greens is assumed to be a standard of civility. They cannot comprehend that intelligent people could independently see Labor as an omnishambles that can't even govern itself. You can't have a rational conversation with moralists. They are good, and everyone else is stupid and evil and must be converted. This is why they won't admit to ABC bias and groupthink that is evident to an earthworm. It will never change unless the ABC is sold off. No Leftys, I'm not looking for a conservative monopoly, just some reasonable attempt at balance. Anything else discredits these people who claim to support diversity. Murdoch papers are better than this, and they aren't taxpayer funded.

RayS:

16 Aug 2013 8:19:54pm

Whatever reason people think they should vote Abbott in for, they probably won't get what they hope for. Abbott is removing the carbon tax and mining tax, keeping the compensation for power cost rises, take nothing away, promise whatever sounds good, but also swears he will deliver a surplus and refuses to say how.

So, Abbott will fail. He will either send the economy into recession or depression or simply run even larger deficits than the ones he is screaming about now. It is written and so very predictable.

Oh well, although the Murdoch press will make excuses for Abbott, at least I will enjoy saying I told you so.

Peter Abbott:

CC:

16 Aug 2013 6:55:20pm

Have a look at their ABC's fact meter.As much as it must have hurt to publish this result for the ABCit has the last 4 big statements put through the process has Rudd as being the most untruthful.A new porky every day and the public are now onto it.1. employment growth is actually slowing 2. It wasn't 70% sent to Australia after Narau (more like 40%)3. The 70B black hole is a fabrication4. forgot the last one

Bighead1883:

andy:

16 Aug 2013 8:30:04pm

cite the lies then. and let's compare this stack to the many demonstrated lies that rudd has enacted in public life. there is a world of difference between saying you might not be 100% accurate if you're called to talk off the cuff, and rudd's many lies that have been shown to be lies.

Alpo:

16 Aug 2013 6:43:39pm

"he is still prone to outbursts of violent temper and foul language."... Never like the wall-punching Abbott, especially when he does so with those silent looks he reserves for journalists.... et-boring-cetera....

frangipani:

16 Aug 2013 7:32:34pm

@Alpo - apply the same standards to Rudd that you do to Abbott. Exactly the same standards. Male chauvinists? Well, Abbott has the reputation, but Rudd, the Gillard-destroyer, has the record. Hostile to refugees? Abbott will only give them TPVs, Rudd won't give them anything. Northern Development? crap when Abbott comes up with it, genius when Rudd does.

Do you actually think that most of us are going to fall for all this one-sided analysis from you or anyone else? There's not a thing that Rudd hasn't backtracked on; Tony may be a self-professed liar, but we have had five years of Kevin being a self-proven one.

Neither of them and neither of their parties, are worth the powder to blow them up. If you can admit that, you might be on the way to recovery....

John:

Rudd was proved to have a violent temper, be prone to foul language and to be an uncontrollable micro-manager by a large part of his own team who threw him out for those very reasons.

Abbott, on the other hand, is only accused of punching a wall (and his accusers are so haphazard that they can't make up their minds as to whether it was a punch or a slap) based on an unproved allegation in a David Marr book that has been shown to be wrong by witnesses of the actual event.

As for Abbott giving silent looks to reporters - well, Mr Rudd is giving silent looks, and the cold shoulder treatment, to his own Ministers, he admitted today, when discussing his Northern Australia proposal and the associated tax concessions. "They will be informed", he said, "in good time".

Bill Shorten was quick off the mark to lodge his complaints about these sorts of policy "throw-away" lines being made on the run.

victor:

Mulky:

16 Aug 2013 7:13:18pm

No, they just differ in opinion to you. I don't like Rudd, I have no strong feeling either way for Gillard but I would not vote for Abbott under any circumstance. He stands for all that is wrong with Australia. There are many more like myself. I won't make he same mistake as you and say that nobody likes him because I know that not to be true but he is the last choice for many.

Red:

BG:

Bighead1883:

16 Aug 2013 6:04:13pm

What an excellent piece of writing Latika.You seem to have the pulse reading of Kevin Rudd correct.From your piece I feel that you are saying to Rudd,look just take off the gloves and go for it.I believe your gut feeling is correct.So with that approach he needs to remind all of the good things that came out of the stimulus package.Now all other countries in the EU except Poland did what America did,austerity and Q/E in one way or another.Australia and Poland did direct stimulus which gave that money as spending on infrastructure and with Australia,a $900 cash stimulus to taxpayers.Our other G20 partners did Q/E and this money stayed with the Central Bankers and was swapped for bonds to keep government going.Meanwhile the excreta hit the fan,massive unemployment,housing repossession etc.Rudd made Australia avoid that.He implemented the insulation scheme that insulated a million houses that kept people employed and worked very well for being started so quickly.Abbott/Murdoch and Co hated this,so carried on like pork chops because 4 people died and some houses caught fire blaming Rudd for it.Yes they blamed him so much that one would have thought the arson squad and homicide would have come for him.Then the BER in tandem with the insulation scheme was brilliant.Where I worked in Adelaide[boilermaking]they had a downturn for years and were just scraping by as were other fabricators in town.The BER kicked in and the place buzzed.Just where I worked the workforce tripled,every building contractor was flat out and bills got paid.Thank you Kevin Rudd you did a fantastic job under the harshest possible conditions.The thanks you got for that was sickening to us,but hey you`re back,and that`s what counts.The LNP/Murdoch negativity of the last three years has sickened us all.So run on your merit,because you have done well and remind Mr Negativity that positivity works.

Disgusted Veteran:

16 Aug 2013 6:49:22pm

Bighead 1883. You are obviously a union member and your bias shows through. KRudd is not a leader (never has been and never will be) and he is just so far out of his depth it is not even funny. The reason he is seen with school kids so much throughout this election is because they see him as a reality star and he gets his daily dosage of hero-worship. That is not leadership and actually demonstrates how street dumb he is. He can not run on his history or past achievements because he knows (or his advisors do) that he will get smashed on it. Unfortunately for all the die hard supporters of his party he is a dead man walking and come 7 Sep he will become a footnote in Australia's history.

Bighead1883:

16 Aug 2013 7:22:52pm

So kissing the back of a mum`s head and saying that candidates have sex appeal along with suppository thinking is more to your liking then?.He lost the unlosable 2010 election and has had a dummy spit since.Fancy blaming the 4 deaths during the insulation scheme on the PM.The contractors were clearly at fault.I suppose you blame Rudd for the asbestos pit happenings in the NBN rollout when it`s Telstra who`s the main contractor subbying out all it can.What`s wrong with schoolkids liking the Prime Minister.Children and dogs can pick people.Abbott scares children and dogs,that say`s it all.Even the woman who held the child turned from him and he kissed the back of her head,gone viral on the net.

llanfair:

16 Aug 2013 6:08:20pm

Maybe Howard and Costello recognised a resource price bubble for what it was (a short-term spike in commodity prices while supply caught up with demand), and considered it imprudent to rack up recurrent promises on the back of a short-term win-fall - and put the money in the bank instead (I note the future fund still only covers about 40% of Federal Government Superannuation liabilities).

Maybe Rudd was wrong in 2009 to support the Public Services recommendations to redefine GDP, in order to make the cost of Government as a ratio of GDP lower, and allow them to pay themselves more (I note the average public servant earns about 20% more than the average private sector worker).

The problem Labor faces is that it has used far too much "imagination", which I assume to mean more spin, during its time in office. While acknowledging that the LNP is just as gutless and should be running on a "Government as a Utility" model (lean, focused and ruthless on things that do not work), Labor needs to own up to the fact that its ideology is only sustainable with a 15-20% across the board increase in tax.

If it cannot sell this now (aka John Hewson and GST), it should still stick to its guns and recontest once people realise that elderly beggars on every street corner is not a good look.

The problem is not what Labor wants to do, it is just that they expect our children and grand children to pay for it. Stealing from the mouths of babes come to mind!

tc21:

16 Aug 2013 6:15:13pm

People aren't stupid, Rudd was dumped because he want any good, he may be a people's person but he flip flops on issues to stay popular. We all know he tiredlessy worked behind the scenes to undermine the Gillard government and ruined the genuine successes and vision of her government. There is no way the Labor Party will be reflected which is a shame as an Abbot government will be awful. Living under conservative governments is no fun unless you're privileged and rich.

jerrythemouse:

16 Aug 2013 6:16:02pm

I am not sure whether or not KR does have the ear of the people. He certainly did once and unfortunately he made too many mistakes when he was PM and lost any right to be trusted.

KR is a man with great ideas and poor execution. His oratory skills are terrific and he can hold an audience and connect with them. Sadly for KR running a country also requires key skills he and his team have proven they are lacking over the last 6 years.

Would Labour do better with a better message? Without a doubt they would but to suggest that people still listen to KR with his audacity to suggest a ?New Way? because the last 6 years did not work is incredulous. For a man who was , at times, inspirational to a nation, to presume so many of us are fools is either stupid, desperate or desperately stupid.

The real question for many voters now is not so much can KR run the country. He has proven conclusively that he can?t. No, the question is can Tony Abbott run the country? I certainly don?t have the answer to that but I suspect he would be troubled to do any worse.

Team Gee:

16 Aug 2013 6:22:44pm

Hahahaha. A clumsy Labor propaganda piece.

Rudd arrogantly believed he was the Grand Chef Colonel Sanders and only he knew the secret recipe of KRudd Fried Chicken (KFC). Gillard threw him out of the kitchen with the help of those faceless men but as they say, there too many cooks spoiling the broth. All those career, self serving union apparatchiks putting their hands & snouts into the pot and thus compromising the original flavour which was made worse when Greens were also thrown into the mixture.

Rudd may be promising a New Way but the same union sous chefs are still there spinning the pot (and plots) and cooking the Budget books as well. The Greens stain just won't come out either. The New Way original recipe which Colonel KRudd trying to sell today is bland, tasteless and comes at a fantastic price of $300 BILLION more than what it cost in 2007.

Oh, yes indeed. The same Labor cooks & crooks are still fighting among themselves in the kitchen. The Greens are hovering around trying to sniff the Carbon Taxes and the rehired Grand Chef is too full of himself to care what happens to the final product as long as he wears the toque (that's the chef's hat).

Gillard may have lost the ears of the people but the people can't stomach anything that comes out from that Labor kitchen anymore. The secret herbs & spices aren't that secret anymore. The public knows now that that they are a mixture of union leaders selfish ambitions and corruption. The public also knows the way it's cooked. Through treachery, spin, lies and back flips.

The final dishes described on the Labor menu doesn't come out as advertised. Most are melanges & trifles from yesterday which reek of in-fighting, incompetence and all have a strong stench of Carbon Taxes. All that the New Way involves is reheating a rotting dish and serving it out as something new, with higher taxes & prices attached.

It doesn't matter whose face is on the advertising billboards of Krudd Fried Chicken (KFC) today. The BRAND itself is so toxic that the people won't buy it anymore. It just ain't finger lickin' good no more.

WhoVotedForPrivatisation.:

16 Aug 2013 6:24:59pm

Come on Labor,expose Abbott/Turnbull NBN FTTN lies,and hurry.Along with Gonski and the NDIS Australia needs all these in tandem.Rudd exposing the money coming to the LNP for advertising from Big Tobacco was good,I never knew those merchants of death were doing that.

Sam:

16 Aug 2013 6:26:44pm

Once again the ABC is shown up as barracking for the ALP merely because it comes up with nice sounding policies.How are any of these policies going to be paid for if we continue to run up deficits?The NBN will never be delivered and if miracle of miracles it were delivered it wont be in our life-times'.In the meantime it is only about "selling" the policies - if only Super Kev could translate his ersatz popularity into people actually believing he could actually develop and deliver good policy.Dream on Latika - perhaps you could provide some journalistic comment rather than your wishful thinking.

Blueboy:

16 Aug 2013 6:38:51pm

Well so much for being non partisan! According to Latika "After the past six years, the question for voters is why this Government deserves another chance. Labor thus far has failed to provide a persuasive answer, even though it has one."Deficit after deficit, budget after budget blown out by huge margins, last one $33billion after only a few weeks. Yeah, sure have some persuasive answers!

Shortly followed up with "But Rudd has the one thing Julia Gillard had well and truly lost, and that is the ear of the people, many of whom tell MPs they would do anything to NOT have to vote for Tony Abbott."

Gosh glad to see ABC reporters staying impartial and only reporting the news. God forbid they would act like those horrid Murdoch reporters and show political bias. No! never, the ABC biased towards Labor, never happens! Just ask the Friends of the ABC or any of their political reporters they will confirm how neutral the ABC is. See proved, what more do you want.

Sept 7 can't come around soon enough for me then I will watch all the excuses from the ABC how we ALL hate Abbott but just voted him and his party in by a historic landslide....Duh! Blissfully blind. The tradegy is I buy Murdoch papers with my hard earned after tax money, MY choice, but I pay these ABC reporters with my tax dollars, NO choice.

OUB :

16 Aug 2013 6:46:18pm

Respectfully, hopefully, you're wrong Latika.

A year or two ago researchers tried to use aversion therapy to teach an endangered native carnivore to stop chewing on canetoads and dying. They'd make sausages out of canetoad legs and feed them to the quolls. Pretty soon the quolls got sick of feeling nauseous and started avoiding the toads. Hopefully they taught their offspring to do the same for a happy non-ending, don't know.

Kevin Rudd is a canetoad, as any New South Welshman will quickly point out. Voters had a diet of Rudd thought sausages for three years. The body reacts to the reintroduction of same into the diet. Every selfie inflames an old ulcer. Or so I hope.

Rudd was recharged during his time in the wilderness. In his bubble he was barely touched by reality. He has emerged from that bubble and is now trying to inflate bubbles of his own. I don't think these hastily assembled structures will hold together for three weeks. The planks holding the facade in place are too apparent to anyone doing an inspection. Rudd is deflating.

Even Rudd's mantras are recycled, productivity from 2007. Would you buy a used mantra from this man? Competitiveness will come down to survival of the fittest. Diversification - who is going to start a new business under a Rudd regime? There is no stability. Calls for cooperation between business, unions and Labor are a sham. Business will be the dinner, not the guest.

Rudd Labor is blind and visionless. Voters have seen Rudd's best and know it is inadequate. Rudd started us on the road to fiscal hell. We may not have proceeded very far but Labor will never be able to turn around. Like the Americans he will tell us 'monetarism worked last time, let's just try a bit more' whenever a slowdown occurs. Good intentions, great paving. Rudd cannot win the coming election. Abbott may be able to lose it but Rudd cannot win. He is not the right man for the times. Any of them.

anote:

16 Aug 2013 7:06:58pm

Largely true but also ...

Labour and Rudd need to realise that policy wise there are few policies in number that really differentiate them and put them ahead of the coalition. They need to stress the importance of those policies, and the broad benefits they provide. Great new visions on the run does not cut it.

Rudd, and Labor, need to stop being hypocritical about Rudd's intention to not be negative about the competition. That includes implying that the opposition are outright lying about something they cannot know because that is itself a lie (eg raising the GST in the next term). Yes, the Coalition does the same but there is no reason to vote for either if they are just going to be equality untrustworthy. If they are not sincere, and that type of presentation is insincere, a pox on both their houses.

SW:

16 Aug 2013 8:00:01pm

It has been said "Oppositions' do not win Elections, the Government of the Day, loose Elections".

Thus the forthcoming Election is Labour's to loose.

Lets hear about some nation building visionary policies not limited to National Broadband, Disability Insurance for all, what about a National Dental Insurance Scheme.A commitment to support for Secondary Industrial Enterprise.Affirmation of Chifley's vision of Keeping the "Light on the Hill" burning brightly.

Don't be afraid of Debt and Deficit, when the Economy is underperforming it is the role of Government to provide some targeted stimulus to keep the momentum going forward.

At the end of the day, as a Society we have an almost insatiable, some would argue justifiable expectation, that Government Federal, State & Local will provide a level of essential Social Services for the benefit of all.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, the money has to come from somewhere.

Government is the great redistributor of Wealth throughout the Economy, otherwise we would be living in a dog eat dog world.

toady:

16 Aug 2013 8:06:19pm

I've given up. Abbott is evasive and hypocritical. Rudd is evasive and hypocritical. Neither is showing that they actually stand for anything beyong winning the election. Same animals, different fur. Abbott will likely win and Rudd will disappear into obscurity at last. Hopefully Labor will promote some true talent and reorganise themselves for the new century - and the next election. By then Abbott and his "team" will have either grown into the job or have shown their true character and we'll have a real election campaign. The current campaign is shallow, meaningless and embarrassing on both sides and not worthy of Australia. Our choice seems to be based on who do you dislike least rather than which party has the right policies. The only thing is to vote purely according to our basic ideological preferences and forget all the personalities and the hype and tripe that's out there.

BT:

16 Aug 2013 8:15:41pm

Latika, as most ABC journalists, your personal political bias makes you unable to properly asses the political situation. 'Great Communicator' Has already been proved to be the Great Fake. He still preaches vision and promises, however only people with serious amnesia problem are still listening. Rudd was great in 2007 with wonderful policies most of us agreed with. However, we now know that he has not followed a single policy to a successful conclusion. Many have turned out to be complete disasters.

That is why his current promises and his 'New Way' are being laughed at. We know that it will be all talk and nothing else. I cannot imagine how anyone could consider re-election a PM with Rudd's record.

Ray Manta:

16 Aug 2013 8:20:24pm

He could try something really radical and give the boot to Big Coal and its lapdog, CSG. That would be sure to win a lot of votes from the good folk of NSW who are now battling to stop the O'Farrell Govt's new plan to make economic importance the sole overriding criterion for all coal mining approvals. Forget the people, forget the environment, just give us the money.

JD:

16 Aug 2013 8:29:08pm

Letika ...

The difficulty with considering your view here is one of your credibility. While the Drum is appropriately a place where even reporters are free to express personal opinions and what some have referred to as their ?right to bring out their activist side?, there is no real distinction between what are your often very subjective opinions and bias and your employment at the ABC as a ?reporter?; or as you are listed here in the Drum, ?a political and social media reporter at the ABC?. So, are you a political and social media reporter or are you a political and social media commentator and, if you wish to be seen as both, how do we, the readership of the ABC, distinguish between the two roles when attempting to distinguish between fact and opinion, activism, personal views, etc. (read that bias)?

A case in point is the following that occurred while you were on the ?campaign trail? with the PM when the PM directed that Mr Geoff Lake be dis-endorsed for the seat of Hotham.

In making the decision that Mr Geoff Lake should be dis-endorsed by the Australian Labor Party for verbally abusing a disabled co-worker over a decade ago and for which he had already apologised, should PM Kevin Rudd also be dis-endorsed by the same Australian Labor Party for bringing the Australian Labor Party, the seat of Griffith and the Australian Government into disrepute after having been drunk in a New York strip club just a decade ago while in New York representing Australia on official business at the United Nations and at taxpayers? expense?

In giving his direction regarding Mr Lake, PM Rudd stated that ?I have concluded that it is inappropriate for Mr Lake to continue as the endorsed Labor candidate for Hotham.? If PM Rudd is not dis-endorsed by the Australian Labor Party and ultimately replaced by a more ?appropriate? candidate for the seat of Griffith and PM Rudd does not himself step aside from his seat of Griffith and, in turn, step aside as the Prime Minister of Australia, is the Australian Labor Party saying that PM Rudd?s actions are considered appropriate and is PM Rudd himself saying that his actions are appropriate and do not reflect badly on the Australian Labor Party, the seat of Griffith and the Office of the Prime Minister.

Why was this never put to the PM by you or any of your ?reporter? colleagues as it clearly goes to the credibility as well as the character of an individual who, once again, is asking the Australian public to trust him and trust that he has changed. How many times can the PM excuse away his actions with the comment ?I never said I was perfect??

Although you have been assigned to ?cover? the PM?s campaign, that does not excuse you from asking the ?hard questions? when they might provide insight into the real character of the person who is asking the Australian public to ?trust? him even though he had been both overtly and covertly ?white-anting? the Australia

william:

16 Aug 2013 8:30:31pm

As far as I am concerned the only good thing K Rudd has done this campaign is to call the election a week earlier than what was originally proposed. That means economic repair and political stability will be put in place earlier. Unfortunately, K Rudd cannot be trusted anymore since he broke his promise not to challenge Julia.

You have no doubt been hearing a lot about the Paris Agreement and know that it pertains to climate change, but are too embarrassed at this stage to ask for an overall explanation of what it's all about.